ExpandCollapse

New Member

Keeping it here temporarilly, as this is where the "ending of Mark" discussion was the prompted the thread. May move it to Theology. Hmmm

Click to expand...

I'm assuming this is where we would hold discussions on underlying text issues. It certainly comes up a lot.

I never thought these source discussions were very interesting. God inspired the gospels and that's all I needed to know. I guess it does matter, though, if you are trying to get your hands around other problems, such as the longer ending of Mark.

I'm a novice in this subject area so I look forward to hearing what other people have to say.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

I think we can rule the Didache out as a source document - that's early 2nd century at best, although it's a useful interpretative tool eg: re the Pastorals' 'offices' - "appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons" (italics mine) - how very Baptist!

ExpandCollapse

New Member

I think it's funny to read books that not only tell us what Q said (although no text exists) but also what the "Q community" believed and taught. Imaginative reconstructions abound.

If Q existed, it may have been similar to the Logia mentioned by Papias, although no one knows for sure. (Matthew wrote the Logia, according to Papias.) Peter's preaching probably was the source for Mark's gospel; and Luke likely researched his while Paul was held in Caesarea. And it may well be that the old belief in a common oral tradition underlying the Synoptics is the right answer after all.

Quick Navigation

Support us!

The management of Baptist Board works very hard to make sure the community is running the best software, best design, and all the other bells and whistles that goes into a forum our size.Your support is much appreciated!